After reading the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) article by Lee Min-yung (李敏勇) on Feb. 19, I agree with his view that “because of the remnants of the Republic of China [ROC], the illusion of existence within another government’s system, Taiwan has yet to complete the construction of a sovereign independent state. Supporters of the ROC need to look at this plight.”
The ROC government-in-exile has occupied Taiwan for more than 60 years, resulting in great harm to Taiwanese.
The media have recently been discussing the so-called “1992 consensus,” the “1996 consensus,” a “constitutional consensus,” a “Taiwan consensus” and other political slogans. These are just slogans created to mislead the public. They do not help solve the issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty and independence.
Some people are also just using elections to gain power within the system. However, the existence of the privilege elected officials enjoy does not solve the issue, either. Taiwan is still trapped in the system of the ROC government-in-exile.
Thirteen years ago, in the article “Taiwanese Sovereignty, Independence and the Republic of China,” my late husband, C.C. Yang (楊基銓), concluded that “the only way is to clearly define the distinction between Taiwan and China — the clearer the better — and believe that if we do all these, Taiwan can gain the acceptance of all countries and emerge to become a truly sovereign and independent state.”
Over the years, I pondered why Taiwanese always want to struggle for power within the system. Why not use historical evidence and principles of international law to break away from the ROC government? Is it because of the selfishness of Taiwan’s political figures?
The recent incident of the Philippine government sending Taiwanese fraud suspects to China is the product of the system of the ROC government. If you don’t want to break away from the system, you can only blame yourself and not President Ma Ying-Jeou’s (馬英九) administration.
To save Taiwan from Chinese annexation, we should all recognize this fact and work on breaking away — as soon as possible — from this government-in-exile system.
Yang Liu Hsiu-hwa is chairman of the International Cultural Foundation.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath